📍 LENEXA CITY COUNCIL — TUESDAY, AUGUST 18

There is a lot on Tuesday night’s City Council agenda. We’re leaving the FY2027 budget out of this post because that deserves its own discussion.

Looking through everything else, here are the items we think deserve the most attention and the questions we still have.

1. City Manager Contract: 5% Retroactive Raise + Contract Extension

Council will consider another addendum to City Manager Beccy Yocham’s employment agreement. It extends the agreement through December 31, 2026, with the option to continue it through March 31, 2027 if additional time is needed during the transition to a new City Manager.

It also gives the City Manager a 5% merit increase retroactive to May 1, 2026.

There are a few things here we think deserve more explanation.

First, the actual addendum Council is being asked to approve isn’t attached to the online packet. Residents are instead told that it is available for review in the City Clerk’s office.

Second, why is the merit increase being made retroactive to May 1 when Council isn’t considering the addendum until August? What was the City Manager’s salary before the increase, what will it be after, and what is the actual dollar value of the retroactive compensation?

And there is some important context here. At the August 4 meeting, Council spent 45 minutes in executive session specifically discussing the City Manager employment agreement.

Two weeks later, the resulting agreement is back before Council… on the Consent Agenda.

We’d like to see the full agreement attached before Council votes on it. More broadly, we’d like to see Lenexa make it standard practice to attach contracts and amendments when Council is being asked to approve them. Telling residents that a document is available at the Clerk’s office technically makes it accessible. Putting it in the packet makes it meaningfully accessible.

2. Black Hoof Southern Connection: How Much Input Will Residents Actually Have?

*** This may be the item we’re watching most closely.

Staff and consultant Vireo have selected the Black Hoof Southern Connection, linking Black Hoof Park and Buffalo Meadows Park, as the first priority from the recent trail study to move forward.

Council is now being asked to approve another $96,020 for additional design, public engagement, construction documents and eventually construction administration and oversight.

During the Committee of the Whole discussion, the City said residents would have an opportunity to participate as the trail moved through the design process.

Tuesday’s packet gives us a better idea of what that participation will look like.

The consultant’s scope says public engagement will occur during final design. At that point, Vireo will present the proposed alignment, gather public feedback and identify opportunities for “refinement” before completing construction documents.

The priority connection has already been selected. By the time public engagement happens, a proposed alignment will already exist. Residents will then be asked to react to it and suggest refinements.

What parts of this project will actually still be open to change when residents are brought into the process?

Can residents meaningfully influence the route? How close it comes to homes? Crossings? Access points? Screening or buffering? Could public feedback result in a substantial alignment change?

Or will residents primarily be asked to comment on a plan that’s already largely developed?

Public engagement is most meaningful when it happens early enough to actually influence the outcome. After what residents were told at Committee of the Whole, we hope this is more than a rubber-stamp feedback process.

There’s another transparency issue here too: there is no proposed alignment map or consultant amendment attached to Item 9 in the packet.

If Council is being asked to spend another $96,020 to move this project toward final design and construction documents, residents should be able to easily see exactly what is being approved. Council saw it last week… some residents may not have and they shouldn’t have to search for it.

3. $782,817 Pavement Change Order

This one sounds alarming when you first see the number, but there’s actually some good news behind it.

Pavement bids came in more than $700,000 below estimates. Staff wants to use available project funding to add about 5.05 lane-miles of work on Lackman Road and Ridge Drive.

That increases the existing contract from about $1.29 million to $2.07 million which is an increase of approximately 61% — but staff says the additional work remains within the already-approved project budget.

Getting more roads completed with money already budgeted is a good outcome.

But a 61% expansion of an existing contract does raise a procurement question:

At what point does additional work become large enough that it should be competitively bid as a separate project rather than added through a change order?

And again, this is on the Consent Agenda.

4. $139,892 to Design a Sidewalk That Isn’t Funded for Construction

Council will consider an engineering agreement for $139,892 to design a missing sidewalk along the west side of Monrovia between 79th and 83rd Streets, plus a short section near Rosehill Road.

There is an important detail buried in the description: Construction isn’t currently funded.

Staff intends to complete the design but says the City will not move forward with bidding construction until funding becomes available.

We’d like to know: What is the estimated construction cost? What funding source does the City expect to use? And when does staff realistically expect this sidewalk to be built?

If we’re spending almost $140,000 on design today, residents should have some idea whether construction is expected next year or whether the plans could sit on a shelf for several years.

5. A Bigger Question About the Consent Agenda

This may be the question tying several of these items together.

Items 1–11 are all on Tuesday’s Consent Agenda.

That means they can be approved together in a single vote without individual discussion unless an item is pulled.

Included in that group are:

the City Manager employment agreement and retroactive raise;

a $96,020 amendment advancing the Black Hoof trail project;

a $782,817 pavement contract change order;

a $139,892 engineering agreement;

and more than $1.1 million in stormwater construction.

Consent agendas are normal. They keep routine government business moving and prevent meetings from becoming unnecessarily long.

But what does Lenexa consider routine?

At what point does the dollar amount, public interest or policy significance of an item warrant putting it on the regular agenda so Council discusses it publicly before voting?

6. Other Items on Tuesday’s Agenda

There are several other items that appear much more routine.

The City will consider a $1.116 million stormwater contract for the Strang Line Road area. The winning bid came in below the engineer’s estimate, and the larger project will eventually include streetlight work that will be bid separately.

Council will formally accept the completed $2.965 million Freedom Fields salt and fueling facility and the completed Green Prairie pavement reconstruction project.

There are also additional steps related to the Fire Station 6 redevelopment, more ADA design work at 87th & Scarborough, participation in a new EMS reporting system and approval of the Red Friday street closure at Lenexa Public Market.

The scheduled public hearing concerning the fire-damaged home at 20826 W. 89th Terrace has been canceled because rebuilding has begun and the required footing/foundation inspection has been completed.

Council will also hold a public hearing on a small right-of-way vacation near the future Fire Station 6 site. A utility easement will remain in place.

Our Biggest Questions for Tuesday

When you strip away all the paperwork, these are the questions we think matter most:

1. Why isn’t the City Manager contract amendment actually attached to the packet, and why is the 5% merit increase retroactive to May 1?

2. What parts of the Black Hoof trail design will genuinely remain open to change once residents are invited into the process?

3. If public feedback strongly opposes or substantially changes the proposed trail alignment, is the City prepared to redesign it?

4. At what point does a major contract change — like a 61% increase — warrant separate competitive bidding?

5. What is Lenexa’s standard for deciding whether an item belongs on the Consent Agenda rather than receiving individual public discussion?

Your city. Your right to know.